Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Cole v. Cole

Utah Supreme Court

Decided February 20, 1942No. 6386Published

1ConcurrenceMcDONOUGH, Justice

The delivery by plaintiff and acceptance by defendant of the $1,383, and $120 checks in response to the court’s decree does not, in my opinion, invoke the rule relative to keeping a tender good. Each check was accepted. Its receipt under the facts of this case constituted a conditional payment of the obligation, the condition being that it be paid upon presentation to the bank upon which it was drawn. Had the check been presented to the bank one year after its date and been paid, no attempt to cash it in the meantime having been made, the payee would not be entitled to interest for the year…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tonnar v. WadeMississippi Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Sardeson v. MenageSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API